Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

Gervase Markham wrote: > Which should I have done? That's the question I'm saying that anyone who > wants to extend a formerly binary tag with new values needs to provide > an answer to before they start using the new values. IMO, one should implement the even-more-defensive option C, which is: i

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

Hi, Gervase Markham wrote: > Say I'm a general purpose renderer who shows access. I understand > bicycle="no" and bicycle="yes", and show them accordingly. You will also have to understand "way without bicycle tag" because that's what 90% of ways have. > Now, instead > of someone coming along w

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

Frederik Ramm wrote: > Without commenting on the rest of the discussion: Surely you (the > renderer) must draw such an object as if there were no bicycle tag at > all, whatever that means for you. But that doesn't work, does it? Say I'm a general purpose renderer who shows access. I understand

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

Gervase Markham wrote: > Richard Fairhurst wrote: > > if access==no or access==false then allowed=no else allowed=yes > > So basically, you have to decide that all unknown values default > to either one or the other. > > If I'm a renderer, and I come across bicycle=difficult, and I only > know

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

Hi, Gervase Markham wrote: > If I'm a renderer, and I come across bicycle=difficult, and I only know > about "no" and "yes", which one do I assume? Without commenting on the rest of the discussion: Surely you (the renderer) must draw such an object as if there were no bicycle tag at all, whatev

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

Richard Fairhurst wrote: > Sure it does. > > if access==no or access==false then allowed=no else allowed=yes So basically, you have to decide that all unknown values default to either one or the other. If I'm a renderer, and I come across bicycle=difficult, and I only know about "no" and "yes",

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

Gervase Markham wrote: > Richard Fairhurst wrote: >> bicycle=no|yes|difficult|unsuitable > >The trouble with that sort of thing, as compared to (ignore the actual >tag names, they are just to give an idea): > >bicycle=yes >bicycle:surface=poor > >(i.e. splitting out access from quality) is that th

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

Richard Fairhurst wrote: > bicycle=no|yes|difficult|unsuitable The trouble with that sort of thing, as compared to (ignore the actual tag names, they are just to give an idea): bicycle=yes bicycle:surface=poor (i.e. splitting out access from quality) is that the former scheme doesn't have fallba

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

On Tuesday 02 December 2008 19:38, Alex Mauer wrote: > Ed Loach wrote: > > Looks good to me. Describe what the road is like, rather than making > > subjective judgments. Every driver/cyclist/vehicle will be different > > and will have to make their own choices. You can't tag for that. Or > > perhap

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

Ed Loach wrote: > Looks good to me. Describe what the road is like, rather than making > subjective judgments. Every driver/cyclist/vehicle will be different > and will have to make their own choices. You can't tag for that. Or > perhaps usability:kia_cee'd:edloach=good / > usability:unicycle:edloa

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

2008/12/2 Bernhard Zwischenbrugger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Douglas Furlong wrote: > >> 2008/12/2 Bernhard Zwischenbrugger <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > [EMAIL PROTECTED]>> >> >> >> >> pothole_ratio=0.2 #20% of the surface are potholes >> max_pothole_size=50cm >> >> >>If it is a f

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

Douglas Furlong wrote: 2008/12/2 Bernhard Zwischenbrugger <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > pothole_ratio=0.2 #20% of the surface are potholes max_pothole_size=50cm If it is a frequently traveled road by motorised vehicle, that size will no

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

pothole_ratio=0.2 #20% of the surface are potholes max_pothole_size=50cm If it is a frequently traveled road by motorised vehicle, that size will not be very static. That depends on the country!! Bernhard begin:vcard fn:Bernhard Zwischenbrugger n:Zwischenbrugger;Bernhard email;in

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

2008/12/2 Matthias Julius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sebastian Spaeth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Per wrote: > >> Now we can see a big discussion, but no one did anything constructive! > >> One thing is clear, we need a tag to describe the usability of ways. > >> If you don't like smoothness inve

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

Sebastian Spaeth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Per wrote: >> Now we can see a big discussion, but no one did anything constructive! >> One thing is clear, we need a tag to describe the usability of ways. >> If you don't like smoothness invent a better scheme! >> Smoothness is better than nothing.

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

> surface=cobblestones/paved/gravel/sand/dirt/grass > width=1m/2m > ele=100m vs ele=150m > > ? Looks good to me. Describe what the road is like, rather than making subjective judgments. Every driver/cyclist/vehicle will be different and will have to make their own choices. You can't tag for that.

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

Per wrote: > Now we can see a big discussion, but no one did anything constructive! > One thing is clear, we need a tag to describe the usability of ways. > If you don't like smoothness invent a better scheme! > Smoothness is better than nothing. surface=cobblestones/paved/gravel/sand/dirt/grass w

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

Stephen wrote: > It's a warning, not a restriction. There are signs I've noted near here that are warnings: "Unsuitable for motor vehicles" This isn't an access permission, and isn't something I'd say was suitable for the proposed smoothness tag (as it is fine for cyclists and pedestrians, and

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

> > Where you have the sign post for 4WD only, is that an access restriction or > a suggestion? > > I.E. If you go on that road with a motorbike, or a 2wd vehicle, could you > face prosecution? Or would you just be considered a bit foolish? > It's a warning, not a restriction. I regularly take m

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

Douglas Furlong wrote: > My biggest issues is that smoothness varies depending on the vehicle in > question, and as such it's just to vague to really be of use. No it doesn't. It's not like a paving machine runs just ahead of every off-road vehicle, making the road smoother for them. The smoothn

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

Frederik Ramm wrote: > Gervase Markham wrote: >>> Most of all since we're growing exponentially and even if we had 90% of >>> mappers agree on something today, in two or three months those 90% would >>> perhaps only form 30% of the community... >> This is actually an argument _for_ Map_Features a

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

hi smoothness I found a wiki page - but it's in German: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zustandserfassung_und_-bewertung They have a scale from 1 to 5 for "zustandswert": 1.5 : maximum for new roads 3.5 : warning level 4.5 : /"Schwellenwert" - the road must be repaired /For measuring there

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

Douglas Furlong wrote: > 2008/12/1 Matt White <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > Douglas Furlong wrote: > > > > This makes is pretty straightforward to tag for all vehicle > types > > easily > > - a tertiary road that has a fair few potholes co

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

2008/12/1 Matt White <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Douglas Furlong wrote: > > > > This makes is pretty straightforward to tag for all vehicle types > > easily > > - a tertiary road that has a fair few potholes could be > > smoothness=bumpy (given that car is the primary vehicle for the > >

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

2008/12/1 Robert Vollmert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > 2008/12/1 Richard Fairhurst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> Personally I believe the easiest and most flexible thing is just to extend >> the access tags: >> >> bicycle=no|yes|difficult|unsuitable >> >> so you'd get >> >> highway=bridleway >> foot=yes (perm

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

Douglas Furlong wrote: > 2008/12/1 Matt White <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > Richard Fairhurst wrote: > > Robert Vollmert wrote: > > > >> I do wonder why people are always jumping on the corner cases to > >> discredit smoothness=*. > >> > > > >

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

Douglas Furlong wrote: > > This makes is pretty straightforward to tag for all vehicle types > easily > - a tertiary road that has a fair few potholes could be > smoothness=bumpy (given that car is the primary vehicle for the > tertiary > highway type) > smoothness:mtb=b

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

2008/12/1 Robert Vollmert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > 2008/12/1 Richard Fairhurst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Personally I believe the easiest and most flexible thing is just to >> extend >> the access tags: >> >> bicycle=no|yes|difficult|unsuitable >> >> so you'd get >> >> highway=bridleway >> foot=yes (per

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

2008/12/1 Matt White <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Richard Fairhurst wrote: > > Robert Vollmert wrote: > > > >> I do wonder why people are always jumping on the corner cases to > >> discredit smoothness=*. > >> > > > > It's not about corner cases. It's about usability. Remembering what > > very_horrible m

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

2008/12/1 Matt White <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Douglas Furlong wrote: > > 2008/12/1 Richard Fairhurst <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > bicycle=no|yes|difficult|unsuitable > > > > so you'd get > > > > highway=bridleway > > foot=yes (permitted, no problem) >

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

Richard Fairhurst wrote: > Robert Vollmert wrote: > >> I do wonder why people are always jumping on the corner cases to >> discredit smoothness=*. >> > > It's not about corner cases. It's about usability. Remembering what > very_horrible means, or absolutely_smashing, or > hhr_you're_

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

Robert Vollmert wrote: > The obvious problem with this is the massive redundancy. You need to tag > for every possible form of transport, or infer suitability for something > exotic from the provided suitabilities. Yes, infer, like we do with every other tag. People realised they didn't need to t

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

On Dec 1, 2008, at 11:15, Douglas Furlong wrote: > If this is an argument in favour of smoothness, then you would run > in to exactly the same problem (just not as fine grained). > > If a user see's a road as being tagged as "smooth", then they'd > think that they could roller blade on it, whic

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

Douglas Furlong wrote: > 2008/12/1 Richard Fairhurst <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > bicycle=no|yes|difficult|unsuitable > > so you'd get > > highway=bridleway > foot=yes (permitted, no problem) > bicycle:racer=unsuitable (permitted but not practical) >

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

2008/12/1 Richard Fairhurst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Personally I believe the easiest and most flexible thing is just to > extend > the access tags: > > bicycle=no|yes|difficult|unsuitable > > so you'd get > > highway=bridleway > foot=yes (permitted, no problem) > bicycle:racer=unsuitable (permitted

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

On Dec 1, 2008, at 11:02, Bernhard Zwischenbrugger wrote: > In Vienna we have an event called "Friday Night Skating". > Every week about 1000 Inline Skater meet at 10pm and skate on normal > roads. > The police blocks all the roads an it is possible to skate on roads > that are for normal for c

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

2008/12/1 Bernhard Zwischenbrugger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Hi > >> >>> bicycle=no|yes|difficult|unsuitable >>> >>> so you'd get >>> >>> highway=bridleway >>> foot=yes (permitted, no problem) >>> bicycle:racer=unsuitable (permitted but not practical) >>> bicycle:hybrid=difficult (permitted but challe

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

Bernhard Zwischenbrugger wrote: > In Vienna we have an event called "Friday Night Skating". > Every week about 1000 Inline Skater meet at 10pm and skate on normal > roads. > The police blocks all the roads an it is possible to skate on roads that > are for normal for cars only. You can't design/

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

2008/12/1 Richard Fairhurst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Per-15 wrote: > > If you don't like smoothness invent a better scheme! > > Smoothness is better than nothing. > > That's debatable (as well as, er, very_horrible). > > Personally I believe the easiest and most flexible thing is just to extend > t

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

Hi bicycle=no|yes|difficult|unsuitable so you'd get highway=bridleway foot=yes (permitted, no problem) bicycle:racer=unsuitable (permitted but not practical) bicycle:hybrid=difficult (permitted but challenging) bicycle:mtb=yes (permitted, no problem) In Vienna we have an event called "Fr

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

Richard Fairhurst wrote: > Per-15 wrote: >> If you don't like smoothness invent a better scheme! >> Smoothness is better than nothing. > > That's debatable (as well as, er, very_horrible). Agreed It does not provide a platform to build on at all. > Personally I believe the easiest and most flexib

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

Per-15 wrote: > If you don't like smoothness invent a better scheme! > Smoothness is better than nothing. That's debatable (as well as, er, very_horrible). Personally I believe the easiest and most flexible thing is just to extend the access tags: bicycle=no|yes|difficult|unsuitable so you'd g

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

Now we can see a big discussion, but no one did anything constructive! One thing is clear, we need a tag to describe the usability of ways. If you don't like smoothness invent a better scheme! Smoothness is better than nothing. Please have a look at and comment on: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wi

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

Hi, Gervase Markham wrote: >> Most of all since we're growing exponentially and even if we had 90% of >> mappers agree on something today, in two or three months those 90% would >> perhaps only form 30% of the community... > > This is actually an argument _for_ Map_Features and some sort of > m

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

Frederik Ramm wrote: > Most of all since we're growing exponentially and even if we had 90% of > mappers agree on something today, in two or three months those 90% would > perhaps only form 30% of the community... This is actually an argument _for_ Map_Features and some sort of meritocracy, not

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

2008/11/26 Alex Mauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Pieren wrote: >> I would also show the fact that it was approved by >> keeping the entry in the "Approved Features" with a note that strong >> oppositions and open issues have to be fixed before it goes to the >> "Map Features". > > I agree that would be

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

Pieren wrote: > I would also show the fact that it was approved by > keeping the entry in the "Approved Features" with a note that strong > oppositions and open issues have to be fixed before it goes to the > "Map Features". I agree that would be appropriate if there were any strong oppositions be

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

sylvain letuffe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> Alternatively we can choose people who have done a lot of tagging. For >> example Milenko, beej71, wildMan, kiya, Skywave, devrise, blars, GercoKees, >> uboot, MichaelCollinson, andrewpmk, ewedistrict, beldin, Alban, katpatuka, >> ulfl, mackerski dkt

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

> Alternatively we can choose people who have done a lot of tagging. For > example Milenko, beej71, wildMan, kiya, Skywave, devrise, blars, GercoKees, > uboot, MichaelCollinson, andrewpmk, ewedistrict, beldin, Alban, katpatuka, > ulfl, mackerski dkt or Sven Anders. I had a similar idea, democrat

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

Andy, this is a very good summary of the choices we face. As long as important pages on our wiki contain statements like "However, there is no guarantee that a tag listed here will be rendered ...", the public will regard us as amateur map makers. Contrast this with our professional quality render

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

> However, if there is a strong opposition (but not only from one > person), then I would also suggest to re-open the proposal and try to > reply to the valid remarks/questions. I agree with, that. However, I won't say that their are "strong oppositions", for what I have read (appart from Andy l

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features" ( become wiki tool is bad )

On Wednesday 26 November 2008 10:09, Ed Loach wrote: > > PS: so, don't you think wiki would be good to talk about all > > that ? (or a > > forum ?) > > It's a time thing partly. I understand your point, wikimedia has a damed bad missing feature : - sending a mail on modify of page (with modificat

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

> PS: so, don't you think wiki would be good to talk about all > that ? (or a > forum ?) It's a time thing partly. By the time I've read the couple of hundred or so emails that arrive each day, done a day's work and spent at least some time with my family, time to start then reading web-based foru

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

Ok, I used to skate for the past, and what can i say is, the smoothness tag is here very useful... actually all curb are not usable with roller or skate, even if they are with bikes...so this is a tag for someone who wants to map a curb... Thus, the tag makes sense... I think we can manage here i

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

Hi, Slight tangent on the edit war (which has morphed into a discussion of what to do with the ever-growing list of map features on the wiki)... We don't want to tag to the renderer, but knowing what clients utilize what tags is important. In my experience with user-collected data in X-Plane

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 11:50 PM, Frederik Ramm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > As for every tag going to Map Features, maybe it really is time we split - > put everything that is widely used on Map Features, and make another page > with "Other Features" where we have all those that have been proposed

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

First comment on the "ChrisFC" problem - > to be that there's a lack of values Is that what you understood he meant ? I am a bit lost in trying to understand what he does propose to make things better or to give new values... I thought it wa

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

Hi, Pieren wrote: > The feature "smoothness" has been enabled and disabled 12 times in the > past 7 days from the wiki Map Features page: > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Template:Map_Features:smoothness I have tried to understand what this is about but failed. Obviously some guy named "Chri

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

First of all - I think those edit wars are silly. Please think before you get involved in these things. Put your energy into some useful stuff instead of just fighting an opinion you might not understand right now. > Who knows what you can or can't inline skate on? Inline-Skaters do! > Who

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

Hi, Matthias Julius wrote: > The biggest criticism of the voting has been that only very few people > participate in it and how are those 15 people to tell thousands of > mappers how to tag. Most of all since we're growing exponentially and even if we had 90% of mappers agree on something today,

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

I'll admit I visited the proposal page when the call for votes was first announced here in September. The discussion still seemed unfinished, and I couldn't see me ever using the feature, so then forgot about it. The discussion still seems unfinished but the voting seems to have closed with the key

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 8:55 PM, Ralf Zimmermann <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: > As for the tags that are being rendered by Mapnik or [EMAIL PROTECTED], if > somebody makes a list of those I would put them on the wiki somewhere close > to the renderer. This is because of two reasons: > a) If a tag i

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

Ralf Zimmermann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > The voting process and its imperfectness has been discussed a lot. And this > is a > different topic really. But I still see the "voting" process being useful. It > is > a very good way of quickly getting opinions that could leave to one of two >

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

sylvain letuffe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> The place for an "approved" tag which is not widely used is Approved >> features, not Map Features. > > That could be a solution. And I think that's where we need to go anyway as > the > map feature page is just too big. > What you seams to propose

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

Gustav Foseid wrote: > We need to have a place to document the most used tags and tags that > should be known, and easy to find, for newcomers as well as trained > mappers. That is the Map Features page, and it should be reserved for a > core set of tags, recognised by the most important renders

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

> The place for an "approved" tag which is not widely used is Approved > features, not Map Features. That could be a solution. And I think that's where we need to go anyway as the map feature page is just too big. What you seams to propose here is keep "the good tags well in view" and the "bad

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

Hi, >> We should stop the game now. All the people who like the "Map >> Features" page should say something about this edit war even if they >> don't care about "smoothness". I really feel disappointed. >> > > Agreed. It needs to stop, people need to discuss the issue here instead. > Is the featu

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 5:55 PM, Sebastian Hohmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > Even if the tag is horrible, it has been voted on and should thus stay > on Map Features. Or should just everyone edit the wiki without regard > for others. The tag is, in my opinion, very_horrible, but that is beside

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

> Who knows what you can or can't inline skate on? Who knows what makes > a sports car a sports car? What's the difference between a trekking > bike and a city bike? What's the worst terrain a tractor can handle? > I've never even seen a rickshaw and how many people have ridden in a > wheelchair?

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

The "Map Features" page is really a very important page and not only for newcomers. It is supposed to show the commonly agreed way of tagging core features. But now we have this edit war about smoothness which enters in conflict with tracktype and surface. The way how those tags can co-exists is po

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

2008/11/25 Robert Vollmert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Personally, I don't see what's wrong with distinguishing between a > normal paved road and one that's suitable for inline skating with > smoothness=good vs. smoothness=excellent. Or between roughly > cobblestoned road and the one most people wouldn

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

I'm in absolute un-diplomatic mood, but there are, in this mail NO personnal attack of any kind. And as I am writing it, it turns out it is not more a matter of smoothness, but still : > All the people who like the "Map > > Features" page should say something about this edit war even if they >

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 4:55 PM, Sebastian Hohmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > it has been voted on and should thus stay on > Map Features. Therein lies the problem, in my opinion, specifically with the "thus". Things could be voted on, but not put onto the Map Features page, perhaps - otherwis

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

On Tuesday 25 November 2008 17:52, Robert Vollmert wrote: > On Nov 25, 2008, at 17:16, Andy Allan wrote: > > Go ChrisCF is all I can say - I'd rather that the wiki was a > > meritocracy > > With those in charge that show most determination in an edit war? Let's drop oil on the fire ! ( even if it

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

On Nov 25, 2008, at 17:16, Andy Allan wrote: > Go ChrisCF is all I can say - I'd rather that the wiki was a > meritocracy With those in charge that show most determination in an edit war? > than ochlocracy and I'm flabbergasted that such > ill-conceived tagging is now an acceptable norm. Persona

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

Andy Allan schrieb: > On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 3:49 PM, Pieren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> The feature "smoothness" has been enabled and disabled 12 times in the >> past 7 days from the wiki Map Features page: >> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Template:Map_Features:smoothness >> >> We should s

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 04:49:36PM +0100, Pieren wrote: > The feature "smoothness" has been enabled and disabled 12 times in the > past 7 days from the wiki Map Features page: > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Template:Map_Features:smoothness > > We should stop the game now. All the people who

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 3:49 PM, Pieren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The feature "smoothness" has been enabled and disabled 12 times in the > past 7 days from the wiki Map Features page: > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Template:Map_Features:smoothness > > We should stop the game now. All the p

[OSM-talk] Edit war on the wiki "map features"

The feature "smoothness" has been enabled and disabled 12 times in the past 7 days from the wiki Map Features page: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Template:Map_Features:smoothness We should stop the game now. All the people who like the "Map Features" page should say something about this edit